Susan Green Archive | Trotskyist Writers Index | ETOL Main Page
From Labor Action, Vol. 14 No. 2, 9 January 1950, p. 3.
Transcribed & marked up by Einde O’ Callaghan for the Encyclopaedia of Trotskyism On-Line (ETOL).
In the discussion article Socialist Policy and the Rearmament of the New Germany (December 26 issue of Labor Action) Eugene Keller seems to minimize the dangers inherent in the idea that “the first necessity is the unconditional recognition of the right of the Germans as a nation to have their own armed forces.”
“The fact,” he wrote, “that these may be led by reactionaries is, to be sure, of justifiable concern to thinking people everywhere, but the case is the same with the leadership of the armed forces of any nation. Given the opportunity and a little aid from their foreign friends, the German masses are quite capable of dealing with the reactionaries in their midst.”
This is a very comforting statement, if one is looking for comfort, especially if the bad name Nazi is toned down to the much more acceptable “reactionaries.” However, the uncomfortable fact appears to be, judging from all the information coming from abroad, that the rebirth of the German army today on the nationalist basis emphasized by Comrade Keller, could we|l give the Nazi forces the power they seek for a comeback.
Many of Hitler’s faithful are still around, with the training and know-how to take over the organization of a new German army. Thus entrenched in military power, the Nazi elements who have also found for themselves places in industry and in government will have acquired the centralization once more to make a bid for national leadership. Comrade Keller’s confidence that “Given the opportunity and a little aid from their foreign friends, the German masses are quite capable of dealing with the reactionaries in their midst,” is not substantiated. What opportunity does he mean and which foreign friends? These ideas seem too vague to counter against the very definite Nazi danger.
Comrade Keller described the kind of rearmament he thinks the Social-Democrats should work for:
“It would be plausible and practicable to propose and build a militia based on the existing mass organizations, such as trade unions, peasant organizations, etc., with election and rotation of officers and a certain number of hours per week devoted to training in the many special skills needed in a modern army. Insofar as full-time officer personnel would have to be employed, means could easily be found to control their activities. There is certainly ample evidence in the history of the German workers’ movement to demonstrate their ability to organize their own military formations, hence this would be nothing new to at least the older ones among them.”
The question arises as to how realistic is this notion of a people's militia made up of part-time soldiers. Do not “the many special skills needed in a modern army” demand intensive, full-time training? Certainly every army being trained in the world today is based on this assumption. This uniformity does not stem from the politics of the various governments, which arc diverse indeed, but from the technical necessities of modern warfare. In thinking about military matters the notion has to be abandoned that a modern fighting force can be made, as in the olden days, when to seize a gun from behind the door and to join workers similarly armed was deemed sufficient.
However, Comrade Keller’s proposal for a people’s militia is not only unrealistic from the point of view of military requirements. It is inconsistent with his political approach, which seems to imply acceptance of the role that the United States plans for German manpower. After explaining the prospective need of the United States for German manpower oh the continent of Europe in case the Russian armies begin to move, he concludes: “Considering this basic trend of militarypolitical policy, German manpower is obviously a factor which cannot be ignored. The new German army, however, ... must have an ideology. It must at the least be able to feel that it is fighting for a country of its own, if nothing more sublime.” This seems to mean that a new German army—to be sure, with an ideology of its own—is to become part of the military machine of the Western bloc. Therefore, the proposal of a people’s militia has no base at all. Furthermore, with this military-political approach, what becomes of the confidence to control “the reactionaries”? As part of the military machine of the Western bloc, the Nazi army men would find very good berths.
To conclude, then, Comrade Keller does not submit “a sound democratic alternative” to United States military plans. To be sure it is no simple matter to work out a plausible socialist policy in the complicated crosscurrents of international politics today.
On the question of the rearmament of Germany, the problem seems to be three-fold: (1) to restore German national rights; (2) to arrest the power-strivings of the Nazis; (3) to curb the “foreign friends” of the Nazis.
Certainly the restoration of full national rights to the Germans is on the agenda, as will also be the reunification of all of pre-war Germany. What can the Social-Democrats do to prevent these national aspiration from becoming the meat of the ambitious Nazis? It is apparent that, in the international milieu today, the German people have not merely to wage the democratic struggle themselves, but must indeed look abroad for “foreign friends.”
Where else can such friends be found except in the democratic and socialist elements in Western Europe, to whom both Nazism and Stalinism are anathema? In a word, as the German democratic sectors struggle to rid themselves of the supervision of the Allied powers, they must also call for the unification of the peoples of Western Europe in an independent democratic union. This might be a plausible socialist policy.
Instead of pressing for “the unconditional recognition of the right of the Germans as a nation to have their own armed forces” as “the first necessity,” socialists and democrats need to put on the immediate agenda the independent democratic union of Western Europe as the instrumentality to work for the democratic solution of Western Europe’s problems, including military problems.
Susan Green Archive | Trotskyist Writers’ Index | ETOL Main Page
Last updated: 23 February 2023